New brief — where your team's judgment goes, and how it compounds into decision memory that stays yours. Read the brief

Home · Solutions

Supply chain AI agents

Four pillars of supply chain decision making. Every agent sits in one.

Supply chain decisions cluster into four families, and they are not independent: what demand is really doing changes what the plants should run, which changes what you should hold, which changes what you can promise. A2go's agents are organized the same way — each one purpose-built for a decision inside a pillar, all of them reasoning on one shared foundation.

One shared foundation 01 Forecasting & Planning demand signal in 02 Operational Planning capacity and schedule 03 Supply & Inventory what to hold, where 04 OTIF Optimization what you can promise EVERY AGENT SITS IN ONE OF THESE FOUR
Purpose-built for supply chain decisions Every agent tied to a measurable financial metric Coordinated, never working in isolation

The four pillars

Where the decisions live.

Each pillar covers a family of decisions with its own rhythm — a forecast that moves weekly, a schedule that moves daily, a promise that moves in minutes. The agents inside a pillar share its data and its constraints, and the pillars share with each other.

Pillar 01

Forecasting & Planning

What demand is really doing, ahead of the report that says so. Internal and external demand sensing, supplier and distributor forecasting, SKU-level forecasting, and full-horizon forecast and planning.

Moves forecast accuracy and the cost of reactive replanning

Pillar 02

Operational Planning

What the plants can actually run this week. Master production scheduling and S&OP optimization, purchase order excellence, lead-time and safety-stock optimization, and scenario analysis across both.

Moves schedule attainment and planning cycle time

Pillar 03

Supply & Inventory Optimization

What to hold, where to hold it, and what to stop holding. Classification, slow-moving inventory, multi-echelon inventory optimization, vendor-managed inventory opportunity, and supplier reliability.

Moves working capital and inventory health

Pillar 04

OTIF Optimization

What you can safely promise, and what is already at risk. Capable-to-promise, promise-date jeopardy, unexpected customer orders, customer promise intelligence, and revenue and OTIF optimization.

Moves on-time in-full and revenue at risk

In concert

The pillars are not four products. They are one conversation.

A single agent answering one question well is useful. A set of agents answering across the chain — against one another, continuously — is what changes the decision. Before anything reaches a planner, the pillars have already exchanged what each of them knows and settled the tradeoffs between them.

FORECASTING & PLANNING What demand is really doing OPERATIONAL PLANNING What the plants can run SUPPLY & INVENTORY What is on hand, and where OTIF OPTIMIZATION What you can promise → CONTEXT PASSED FORWARD ⇠ CONSTRAINT PASSED BACK One reconciled recommendation RANKED OPTIONS · THE TRADEOFFS · THE EXPECTED IMPACT · READY FOR APPROVAL

Context passes forward, constraints pass back, and the result is one reconciled recommendation rather than four competing ones.

01 Demand informs the plan

A shift in sensed demand does not stop at the forecast. It reaches master scheduling as a change in what the plants should be building, before the monthly cycle would have surfaced it.

02 The plan informs inventory

A resequenced build changes what needs to be on hand and where. Safety stock, replenishment, and slow-moving positions are re-evaluated against the schedule that will actually run.

03 Inventory informs the promise

What is genuinely available — across plants and DCs, net of what the schedule has committed — is what capable-to-promise answers with. Not a static availability figure.

04 The promise pushes back

A promise that cannot be held without breaking a higher-priority commitment returns as a constraint on the plan. The loop closes rather than escalating to a person.

Four pillars, one recommendation, and the tradeoffs already reconciled before a planner sees it.

How the tradeoffs get settled

Optimal for the business, not optimal for one function.

Left alone, each pillar would optimize itself: inventory would carry less, service would carry more, the plant would run the longest campaigns it could. The coordination is what stops four locally correct answers from producing one bad outcome.

Shared inputs

One reconciled view.

Every agent draws from ADOE, so the demand number in the schedule is the demand number in the promise. Disagreements between agents are about tradeoffs, never about whose data is right.

Your priorities

Ranked by your rules.

When pillars conflict, the Judgment Layer decides how the conflict is weighed — which account is protected, when cost yields to service, which supplier is trusted in which season.

The output

A decision package.

What triggered it, the alternatives considered, the constraint that applied, and the expected impact — ranked, with the tradeoffs visible, ready for a person to approve, edit, or reject.

Purpose-built, not repurposed

Every agent exists because a supply chain decision was costing someone money.

A2go's agents were not adapted from general-purpose building blocks and pointed at supply chain afterward. Each one starts from a decision manufacturers and distributors actually lose money on — a schedule that will not hold, a promise date at risk, inventory sitting in the wrong place — and each is tied to a measurable financial metric.

The decisions they are built for

01

Multi-plant master production scheduling

Sequencing across sites that share supply, capacity, and customers — the decision our first production deployment was built on.

02

Multi-level bills of material

One purchased component moving through three BOM levels into four finished goods, traced without a planner rebuilding it in a spreadsheet.

03

Capacity and constraint reasoning

What the line can actually run this week, against what the plan assumes it can.

04

Batch variability and yield

Process environments where the input is not uniform and the output cannot be assumed — including perishability and shelf-life constraints.

05

MES and OT signals

What the floor knows, in the same decision as what the ERP recorded — rather than in a separate report nobody reads in time.

06

Multiple ERPs

Reconciled against the definitions that exist today, with no requirement to standardize the estate first.

Start here

Which decision would you start with?

Bring the one your team loses the most time or margin on. We will show which agents would touch it, what they would need to reason on, and what would reach your planner.